Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: jessandra Date: Jan 20, 2010 1:48pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

My father has a heart operation tomorrow. He had a similar procedure several years ago but it didn't work and this is supposed to be a new and improved method - but slightly more dangerous.

He is scared and behind all my postive support - I am frightened too.

We just spoke on the phone and he told me to come over to take care of Mom if he doesn't return from hospital!

Everything should end up fine (even if the problem isn't solved) but some extra thoughts and prayers would be very much appreciated!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: user unknown Date: Jan 20, 2010 3:46pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

positive thoughts, healing vibes and prayers to you and your father

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: johnnyonthespot Date: Jan 21, 2010 8:45am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Hey Jess. I work in a Hospital and can honestly say that they have these things down pretty good. If this is a scheduled thing ( like it sounds like it is ) then I'm confident they know what they're doing. Don't worry ( yeah i know easier said than done ).

I'm going through some tings with my Mom that unfortunatly doesn't look quite as good

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: banditos33 Date: Jan 21, 2010 8:52am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

WOW you are in the know for a janitor. or gay male nurse

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: johnnyonthespot Date: Jan 21, 2010 8:55am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

was I talking to you Troll? get a life asshole. Maybe I can ask someone to pray for that

This post was modified by johnnyonthespot on 2010-01-21 16:55:24

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: banditos33 Date: Jan 21, 2010 8:56am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

You posted it on an open forum for everyone.you must have been janitor. You should change your name to.....Johnnyonthemop

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: johnnyonthespot Date: Jan 21, 2010 9:11am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

i was talking to a nice person who asked a genuine question for geniune people about something personal in their life. can't you be a real human for once and hijack another thread to get off on?

and no I'm not a janitor and if I was I wouldn't be ashamed of it. I know quit a few houskeepers here and they're good people and hard working and I don't look down on them like you obviously do.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cush212 Date: Jan 21, 2010 5:32pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Sorry, I did not see the top of this post. I did see the bottom though. Glad to hear your Father came through OK... My parents are long and longer gone... I miss them more than I can say... Love "em while you've got "em!!!

I do still have my "Mom away from home, Anita" nearby though!

LOve & Light... J

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SkyDawg Date: Jan 21, 2010 12:29am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

I feel for you Jessandra. My prayers go out to your Dad and your family. Having gone through the same type of thing with both of my parents, I feel for you and your family. Stay strong, and stay loving. Love will see you through.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: TOOTMO Date: Jan 20, 2010 2:47pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Workin' on it now.

TOOTMO

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: lobster12 Date: Jan 20, 2010 3:32pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Jessandra,

there are many fights, knuckleheads and various questionable personalities in this forum but I can honestly say I have never seen anyone turn away a poster in a time of need when family and medical issues are addressed. It's a good group of folks when support is needed. Thoughts and prayers to you and your family during this time.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Finster Baby Date: Jan 20, 2010 4:54pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

All the best to your father and you!!

Good girl for trying to cover your own fears and be there for him!!! I am sure your strength is a great comfort to him in his time of need!

All the peace and good mojo I can muster headed your way.

Please keep us all posted on how everything goes.

And be sure to take good care of yourself as well during this trying time... Dad is going to need you when he pulls through this!!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Miss Divine Date: Jan 21, 2010 1:06am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

You'll all be in my thoughts today.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mandojammer Date: Jan 21, 2010 2:06pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Sigh, late again............

Jess -

My best to you, your Dad and your family. I'm certain everything will come out fine and I'll keep you in my thoughts and prayers.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Wildflowers Lover Date: Jan 20, 2010 9:22pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Jessandra,

I'm with you all the way. I'm going thru something similar with my 82 y.o. Mom at the moment. She had some sort of seizure at a college basketball game on Sat. Don't even recall getting there or climbing stairs to seat. Drs. are saying wasn't a stroke or heart attack. Have done MRI, CT scan, etc. & did some sort of surgery for heart cast or some thing to correct problem hopefully. She's walking with a walker, etc. & eating well. She's just real sore from defibullator & CPR, because they lost her one time.

Thank God her Lord & Saviour was watching over her all day or she might have been home alone & couldn't have gotten help.

Will keep good thoughts & prayers for you & your family.

I also ask for them for my family, as my dad also has horrible signs of Alzheimer's.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jessandra Date: Jan 21, 2010 11:37am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Thanks and my thoughts are with your family too!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jessandra Date: Jan 20, 2010 10:59pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Thank-you ALL very much for your warm-hearted thoughts and good wishes!

I'll know more in about 12 hours and keep you informed!

Much appreciated ;-)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bbbrew Date: Jan 21, 2010 8:04am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Thoughts of strength and healing for you and your dad this morning Jess.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dizbuster Date: Jan 21, 2010 8:21am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

I hope all goes well with your dad. We are all keeping you
and him in our thoughts..........

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dogsinapile! Date: Jan 21, 2010 5:21am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Just saw your post this morning...
Hope all is going well.
Sending the positive your way...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: wineland Date: Jan 20, 2010 8:45pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

My thoughts and prayers are with you and your family. I trust that good will come from the surgery. All my best.

wineland

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: WHARFRAT Date: Jan 20, 2010 3:58pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Positive thoughts, prayers and healing vibes
from NY headed your way to you and DAD!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Jan 20, 2010 3:15pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Warm thoughts indeed.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 20, 2010 2:44pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

I'm in my 50s and count myself lucky to still have both my parents alive and, so far as I know, in good health. I've just got so used to having them around that I really don't know, and don't want to know, how I'd handle losing either, or both, of them. But then I guess no one ever does. Just my roundabout way of saying I hope everything turns out for the best. All good wishes to your father and mother, and to you.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 20, 2010 2:29pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

You got it. I'm actually going through nearly exactly the same thing with my father (though he doesn't have surgery scheduled).

Will be thinking about you (and him!)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jessandra Date: Jan 21, 2010 11:31am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Thanks Diane and best wishes for your father too!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Dhamma1 Date: Jan 20, 2010 2:59pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

I'll be sending warm thoughts and best wishes your way tomorrow. Have faith in life.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 20, 2010 5:02pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Dad's almost always end needing work on their hearts, just like their prostates...went thru it as well with mine.

Here's to hoping for the best of success; hang in there!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jessandra Date: Jan 21, 2010 2:27pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dad's doing fine + more hospital adventures

I just spoke with the hospital and everything is fine. My Dad is back in his room and is expected to return home tomorrow. I don't know if the procedure worked yet but am very relieved that it is over.

It was a very long and emotional day! While I was sitting around biting my finger nails, my daughter Jessie ended up fighting with the bedroom door (her friend holding it shut from the other side) and lost! The doorknob was exactly eye level and got her good. We spent half the afternoon at Emergency. The poor dear is taking it pretty well but she sure looks a mess!

Attachment: poor_jess_1.jpg
Attachment: poor_jess_2.jpg

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 21, 2010 5:19pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dad's doing fine + more hospital adventures

Well, that's great news. You must be so relieved - I know how exhausting these things are. Your daughter's a cutie, especially with a cucumber on her eye.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: user unknown Date: Jan 21, 2010 8:15pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dad's doing fine + more hospital adventures

Good news about your father. Glad to hear things went well. Continued vibes and prayers that the procedure was successful.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mandojammer Date: Jan 21, 2010 5:04pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dad's doing fine + more hospital adventures

That's great news jess!! Glad to hear he's doing well.

And nice shiner on lil Jess - tell her she gets mad cool points for tangling with a doorknob.

If I may pry, it sounds like your Dad was in for a catheterization or some similar cardiac procedure?

If I may not pry, just tell me to shut up and no need to read further.

I'm no stranger to cardiac issues - 7 years ago I was diagnosed with lone paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (about 30 years sooner than expected). So far so good, I have never had to go in for cardioversion or a catheterization. The science is very well developed and while it is certainly scary at first, the medical community has a pretty good handle on how to deal with it.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jessandra Date: Jan 21, 2010 10:59pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dad's doing fine + more hospital adventures

Yes Mandojammer, it was a similar procedure but somewhat different to what they attempted before.

He has had severe Atrial fibrillation for over 15 years and it has been getting much worse over the years. It also seems to be triggered by certain foods and seasonings not to mention alcohol in his case. It used to happen about once a month for several hours and now it is almost weekly and can last well over a day.

They attempted a catheterization about 5 years ago and it didn't work and my Dad was rather hestitant about trying this supposedly new method. (I'm still not quite sure what's different about this but if you are interested I can certainly find out.)

If the procedure was successful my Dad can likely stop taking his beta blockers - meaning he won't be freezing all the time and can probably enjoy spicy foods and occasionally drink a beer, wine or whiskey again. (... and visit his daughter and grandkids without probs ;-)

Glad you have things under control. My father's heart probs began when he was around 55 (prostate was done then too) and that was when he began to take better care of himself and get himself fit. He is now 73, very active and in great shape apart from that damn atrial fib.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mandojammer Date: Jan 22, 2010 8:14am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dad's doing fine + more hospital adventures

Jess -

No need to check on the specifics, the biggest improvement the community has made over the past couple of years is now they are doing a fairly advanced 3D electrical mapping of the heart and they can better pinpoint the offending sodium channel(s) that are causing the afib and can zap it.

I've been lucky that mine is medicinally controlled, but I hate beta blockers. I was on a very high dose that shut me down and I was cold all the time. I also went from a good fighting weight of 205 to 258 pounds in about 6 months. Whenever we went to the beach I got sick and tired of the well meaning GreenPeacers trying to push me back in the ocean and pouring water on my back.

I quit taking the meds, went into pretty severe afib, spent a week in the Cardiac ICU while they shifted me from an arhythmic to a pro-rhythmic meds course and beta blocker dose. My Doc explained it like this (after the "Don't ever do that again you idiot!!" lecture) Heavy duty arhythmic beta blockers chemically establish your heart rate, pro-rhythmics keep you in the ryhthm you are in and can be a much smaller dose. Since switching meds, I have taken all but the last 15 pounds off.

Sounds like your Dad is doing well on the meds course he is on from an afib control standpoint, but he doesn't like the side affects. You might suggest he asks his Doc about a new meds course. It worked for me, but we're all wired a little bit differently.

Best to ya.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 22, 2010 5:22pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dad's doing fine + more hospital adventures

Wow. Glad to hear everyone's dandy.

This post was modified by spacedface on 2010-01-23 01:22:05

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jessandra Date: Jan 22, 2010 12:38pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dad's doing fine + more hospital adventures

Laughing my butt off about the Greenpeace comment :-) !! Save the whales LOL ;-)

The Doc told my father he wouldn't need the beta-blockers at all if this works.

However, I just spoke with Dad and he has no idea if the procedure was successful or not. He didn't see or hear from any doctors before he was released and was only told to visit his urologist because they accidentally punctured something while putting the catheter in and he has some minor bleeding near the bladder.

They didn't say anything about the heart except he was to return for a check-up in 4 weeks.

I guess we'll have to wait and see!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 9:46am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dad's doing fine + more hospital adventures

Ah, those are damn cute pics, esp the one with the cucumber (good method!). Oh, and you do know this MJ fellow is a former Submariner, right? Not sure this is important at the Forum, but those I have known personally generally bear some scrutiny now and again. A 90 day cruise stuck in a tube wizzing around the North Atlantic talking boomers and cutting the cable, gold crews and blue crews--it can't be healthy, can it?



[jk of course! he's a fine member of the Forum]

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Jan 22, 2010 5:28am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dad's doing fine + more hospital adventures

Glad your dad is doing fine

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Finster Baby Date: Jan 22, 2010 5:24am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dad's doing fine + more hospital adventures

Great to hear Jess!!
Glad that he is on the rebound and headed home soon!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: banditos33 Date: Jan 21, 2010 8:33am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Thoughts and prayers are with you. I just have a one question. If a majority of people on here are athiest just who are they praying to for you. Dont carry much weight if they dont believe in what they are praying too.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: johnnyonthespot Date: Jan 21, 2010 8:44am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

hey banditos - why don't you keep your self righteous bullshit to yourself?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: banditos33 Date: Jan 21, 2010 8:51am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Just asking fuck nuts.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 21, 2010 9:14am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Actually, it falls out precisely as indicated in the thread the other day (perhaps I am more aware of who "sits" where because I participated in it for about three days!), so my guess is you just missed who signed in on which side of the River, Jordan and otherwise...

So, the folks above that are on one side mention "prayers" and the others mention "good vibes" or "good luck".

I don't see any flip floppers.

Or, did you just mean that so many mentioned prayers it must be they are in the majority? I am fairly certain that's true; that would be the statistic for most US subpopulations, right? That certainly has been my experience here (more on the "believers" side than the other).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 21, 2010 12:38pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

I'm an atheist and if someone asks me to pray for a sick relative I'll say "Of course." Maybe "it's not effective" because I'm an atheist, but I'll leave that up to god. If he exists, he can work that out - respond to the prayer on its merits if he has a mind to, regardless of what kind of heathen I am.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 21, 2010 12:49pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

If you're an atheist who or what do you think of as the god you're leaving it up to?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 21, 2010 1:14pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

I said "if he exists." But the actual answer is I don't think about it, or try not to LOL.

My point I guess is that if such a god did exist, he (or she) surely would be interested in helping the sick person being prayed for, not worrying about whether the person praying - some internet friend of the sick person's daughter - believes in him or her or not. doesn't make sense to me.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 21, 2010 1:20pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

I hope you're not going to tell me I'm not a very good atheist LOL, I've been told that before.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 21, 2010 2:38pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

I'd suggest that most fall under the following (wiki in this instance) categories:

Apathetic agnosticism (also called Pragmatic agnosticism)
the view that there is no proof of either the existence or nonexistence of any deity, but since any deity that may exist appears unconcerned for the universe or the welfare of its inhabitants, the question is largely academic.

Agnostic atheism
the view of those who do not claim to know of the existence of any deity, but do not believe in any.

Agnostic theism (also called "spiritual agnosticism")
the view of those who do not claim to know of the existence of any deity, but still believe in such an existence.

I'd say that among scientists, most are strictly speaking, agnostic, as their philosophy demands it (we cannot "know" the supernatural), but in terms of their "beliefs" (what they think to be true), they are in effect, atheists.

Hmmm, did we draw you in Sir Rob, Poet Laureate?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billydlions Date: Jan 21, 2010 3:49pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

First off, Glad to hear all went well Jess and sorry about the morons around here.

Question for William Tell: Have you seen the Ben Stein movie (I think it's called Expelled)? There are many scientists that are trying to use science to prove intelligent design, but they are running in to the same problem as scientists who doubt man made global warming. There's a refusal to allow the peer review of any work that may contradict traditional thinking, even if based on science! There's the threat of being blacklisted, loss of job and reputation. A very interesting movie- no matter what your beliefs. Sometimes I think people are afraid of what they may find (for both camps, really)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 21, 2010 4:47pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Yeah, the Intelligent Design stuff is even whackier than Creastionism. It's the most philosophical barren to say "we can't understand, so it must be designed...but we won't say how or whom!" (at least faith based ones make their assumptions clear).

The beauty (yes, truly) of science is that in spite of human nature, it works. Individual scientists are just that: human, with all the failings (ego, pride, selfishness, etc., etc.). But, science as a process rewards (eventually, and not necessarily in their lifetime) those that test and refute theories, even the most popular...often, the first refutation does not allow the individual to benefit (again, human frailties intercede, and the upstart may be blackballed, etc., etc.), but eventually, it (better theory, whatever) wins out (often not fully til the old guard in power passes away).

I think the greatest misunderstanding about science is the popular conflation of "scientists" with "science" in this specific manner (ie, scientists do not have to be completely objective, can be "human", etc., etc.; though of course, there is the much discussed scientific method that does help avoid those traditional human shortcomings in the here and now too).

Probably more than you wanted, eh?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Jan 21, 2010 7:30pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

whackier is a nice word for it. I can think of a few others that are not so nice.

if can't say something nice, don't say anything at all.

This post was modified by elbow1126 on 2010-01-22 03:30:22

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 22, 2010 3:44pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

The problem with scientists is that they claim to speak for science, and yet make assumptions about what they say they can't know.

RE: Intelligent Design, you might check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hoyle, his The Intelligent Universe was quite good.

But I put my money on absolute control not arbitrariness, esp what they call Occasionalism. We all live in "bubbles."

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss... In your eyes, I feel complete...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsEa03p32cg

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 4:05pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Uh...you got me with this one: "The problem with scientists is that they claim to speak for science, and yet make assumptions about what they say they can't know."

Uh...why wouldn't one make assumptions about "I can't know what you are thinking?" or "I can't know if there is this or that deity via the rational methods of science."?

I shudder to think you are now going to support an ID perspective...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 4:15pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

I'd like to reconvene on the above tomorrow - too tired now to do it justice but I'm provoked. A night's sleep might make me feel more inclined to take prisoners.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 22, 2010 4:50pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

There's group think in science even if you want to deny it. A prof at my school Robert Resnick talked about the decades it took for many accepted principles to make it into physics textbooks. And he's not even a critic of science.

The point I was making is that you can't just assume there's no god. That's not rational.

And beyond that there's different forms of logic, some developed in Buddhist Afghanistan, that are just on and off. It's akin to "chaos theory" not being about randomness but instead about a different order of organization.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 6:20pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

OK, you're clearly not reading what I am writing...I outlined science as a process vs scientists; this addresses precisely the point you raised...maybe you missed it ("group think"; I didn't deny it, I acknowledged it, and addressed it).

Sorry, too tired to repeat myself; check it and go from there.

And as to your other point, covered that as well: agnostic on the principle, as a scientist. Don't "assume" anything on that front. Now, as to what I believe, I don't believe in this, and I don't believe in that...where do you or any religious sort get off saying "here! my theory on God is the ONE you have to consider to believe! And if you assume something...it's trouble!" when you turn down any number of whacky theories put forth by any number of folks?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 22, 2010 7:05pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

For "process" you could look at laboratory life studies & the sociology of science, some history of science, and dose of postmodernism too. Science, no matter how we define it, is intertwined with the industrial and military technologies that grounded European movement into and around the world (with extreme prejudice).

It is not "objective" scholarship. When knowledge becomes static, enforced by authority, organized into inflexible social relationships, taught rather than discovered, then knowledge is in the service of power.

The motto is "kill all the brutes." We can see that Nazi science had bias, but our systems with us as the beasties -- no way.

Ok, science is provisional, and that's been accepted at least since Kant.

You say "eventually, it (better theory, whatever) wins out (often not fully til the old guard in power passes away)." Maybe you didn't realize that this is what I was disagreeing with. Or maybe it's your time scale since the results aren't in yet on our species extinction. Anyway René Magritte's The Castle in the Pyrenees is how I see the western consensus reality (where's the "ground"):
http://momofmonkeys.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/rene_magritte_castle_in_the_pyrenees.jpg


And as to your other point, you do seem tired. I didn't insist on a theory as absolute fact, but I did tell you what I thought. I haven't seen any "whacky theories put forth by any number of folks" in this thread.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 23, 2010 5:15am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Even if all this has a kernel of truth somewhere (along with a whopping dose of paranoia), are you saying it is all actually a reason to believe in God?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 23, 2010 8:48am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

"the truth, such as we know it, comes to the fore... "

Yes, it's the such-as-we-know-it part that's the concern.

And no that's not enough to believe in God, but it is an opening. It can open wider by pondering beauty and consciousness, listening to the still small voice of conscience. It can be closed by choosing the chicken or egg or some self-organizing complexity as an answer to the question of first cause.

Once in that abyss, facing death's honesty (I have a hard time leaving Dylan behind), you can still ask God, a word from a Proto-Indo-European root meaning either "to call" or "to invoke." That's very close in meaning to the Biblical Elohim and Alaha and the Quranic Allah.

I don't think mumbling the words works on scoundrels or the prideful so well, but Deadheads are generally a kindly bunch, so the call might be answered.

And sure we *should* be skeptical of the likes of those imagined in Estimated Prophet -- and ones like me who can only communicate with broken phrases. But I don't think the everyone impressed by lightning storms are crazy or talking about a man:

I'll call down thunder
And speak the same
And my word fills the sky with flame
And might and glory gonna be my name
And men gonna light my way

The storyteller makes no choice
soon you will not hear his voice
his job is to shed light
and not to master

Take what you have gathered from coincidence.

This post was modified by spacedface on 2010-01-23 16:48:02

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 23, 2010 8:17am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

What? I have a hard time following you.

Those lyrics are not among my favorite Dead lyrics. I think Let it Grow is a beautiful song - musically. I always cringed a bit for Bob singing those lyrics.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 23, 2010 8:49am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Sorry I mixed Estimated Prophet with Terrapin to contrast Robert Hunter's experience in a lightning storm writing Terrapin to the supposed crazy person in EP.

You not the only woman I've know that doesn't like the lyrics to Let It Grow:
http://artsites.ucsc.edu/GDead/agdl/grow.html

I like it, but maybe the Clapton songs are better, Let It Rain and Let It Grow.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 25, 2010 6:17pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

I love Clapton's Let it Grow. I don't remember the words though. My objection to Gd Let It Grow is the words, not the music.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 8:26pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

The good thing about postmodernity is that it is self-refuting...and yep, I buy completely that science is often entertwined with culture, etc. Fortunately, the good guys win eventually.

The best defense of how science does indeed win out is to look at Stalinist USSR in the 30s under the direction of their scientist, Stalin's best bud, Lysenko...try as they might, they could not fight natural selection and Darwinism...they wanted good old Markist Lamarckianism, but after ten yrs, they had to give up...capitalist inspired "science" won (well, the truth really).

This and many other history of science cases show how science ain't perfect, but eventually the truth, such as we know it, comes to the fore...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cush212 Date: Jan 21, 2010 5:01pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Gawl Dang Tell... Yer smarter than I thought for a guy stuck in 1968 ;)...

How's things in AZ???

Been pretty cold (having become a wimpy Zonie myself) windy and VERY wet here this week!!!

Your pal, J

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 9:43am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Hope it's all working out with your new life in sunny (?) CA!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cush212 Date: Jan 22, 2010 1:00pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Going OK so far... Has not been very sunny of late though... Soggy is more like it! Sounds like you all are getting hammered pretty hard too...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cosmico Date: Jan 21, 2010 8:46pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Well dang, I'm stuck in 1958! Wrong forum for me, but I just wanted to say that. :)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cush212 Date: Jan 21, 2010 9:20pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Expect more to be on the way too... Last blast through here was around noon today, so you're already probably seeing it, but expecting another manana...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cosmico Date: Jan 21, 2010 9:27pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

They're saying tomorrow morning around rush hour will be pretty stormy. I'm just hoping the huge eucalyptus tree in our yard doesn't end up on my house...or on my neighbor's house.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cush212 Date: Jan 21, 2010 9:16pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

;)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 6:56am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

You can always manage to draw me in one way or another you old charmer; shame I was in bed when you issued the invitation, I can see I'll have to start sleeping all day and rocking all night with you people.

I suppose in effect that it comes down to proof versus faith and the difficulty of proving one way or another the existence of something that is, almost by definition, beyond the bounds of direct experience. The existence of god is a theory that I think we'd have to admit is one that ultimately cannot be disproved (or for that matter proved). For the believer, to whom god's existence is an article of faith, proof is not necessary since the workings of god can be perceived in all things.

Arguing for rational scientific explanations of phenomena simply results in an atheistical/theological lockstep retreat towards a quantum/big bang point where direct observation fails and no amount of intellectual crowbarring can either prise the great universal mover and shaker out into the open or establish once and for all the absolute arbitrariness of it all. Though if I was forced to lay my money down I'd be betting on arbitrary.

So, at the end of it all, I suppose I position myself with those who find the whole discussion fascinating but ultimately academic and with no practical bearing on my daily life. I simply find no need to have a belief in god.


"I don't think we're here for anything, we're just products of evolution. You can say 'Gee, your life must be pretty bleak if you don't think there's a purpose' but I'm anticipating a good lunch." - James Watson

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 22, 2010 8:42am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

>I suppose in effect that it comes down to proof versus faith and the difficulty of proving one way or another the existence of something that is, almost by definition, beyond the bounds of direct experience.

But a lot of things that are beyond the bounds of direct experience are proven. I think more to the point is that it's often impossible to prove a negative. Believers will insist "you can't prove there's no god" and don't seem to mind that while this is true, it's irrelevant.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 22, 2010 4:36pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

"you can't prove there's no god"

You can't and it does matter because claiming the contrary is an assumption that violates method, one that denies personal reports.

Consensus reality isn't the final word. Great name for record label though.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 9:00am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Just to be clear, in this instance I was specifically referring to god as being 'beyond the bounds of direct experience'.

But I think I want to take issue with your statement that 'a lot of things that are beyond the bounds of direct experience are proven'. I have to ask, which things? Scientific knowledge, which is the best kind we have, is uncertain and contingent. As Richard Feynman said: '..what we call scientific knowledge today is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty. Some of them are most unsure; some of them are nearly sure; but none is absolutely certain.'

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 22, 2010 10:54am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Most things science has proven are beyond the bounds of direct experience, aren't they?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Jan 22, 2010 11:15am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

It think there is a little bit of apples and oranges to this discussion. As Rob points out scientific knowledge is not static however you are asking for things that are proven by science. I tend to think of these in terms of the Laws of science and most of those are proven and well within the bounds of experience (e.g. gravity). I don't think there will be an experiment that could definitively prove Darwin was correct, however the data that exists is overwhelming and more important never flies in the face of the theory.

Can you give me an specific example of the type of proof you had in mind as being out the bounds of experience? That might help.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 22, 2010 11:52am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

I think we're just defining terms differently. Evolution makes a great example. We don't observe it directly, it's quite counterintuitive, and as far as I understand it's likely there will never be proof (which is why intelligent design-ers keep saying, "It's just a theory").

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Jan 22, 2010 11:54am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Who is defining terms differently? You initially asked about what science has proven but the discussion keeps falling back to scientific knowledge. I was just trying to say that having knowledge does not prove a theory and using evolution as the example.


I always thought the responsibility of science was as much to disprove hypotheses as to try to support them. When they can't be disproven and when the data overwhelming support the theory, as has been the case of Darwin, the theories are accepted even if they can never be proven. If it could be proven it would be law not a theory, like gravity.

However my question still stands. Can you give me an example of what science has proven that is out of the bounds of everyday experience?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 12:03pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

"If it could be proven it would be law not a theory, like gravity."

And yet Newton's law of gravitational attraction was superceded by Einstein's notion of spacetime warping. And that's what I love. The idea, the total acceptance, that there might be a better explanation around the corner, that it's totally worthwhile to keep on looking. And this surely is where science and religion part company in that religion works on the assumption that the 'answer' has already been handed down and it's sheer folly, not to say sinful, to question and look for something else.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Jan 22, 2010 1:27pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)


re: "religion works on the assumption that the 'answer' has already been handed down and it's sheer folly, not to say sinful, to question and look for something else"

I don't think that is necessarily true, I am Catholic (as you all know by now) and what I've been taught is simply the lesson of Jesus, which at the most basic level is Believe in Jesus as the Son of God and you will be saved (sins forgiven etc . . .), This teaching has nothing to do with and is not mutually exclusive from the quest for knowledge of our physical universe or our metaphysical reality. At least in my mind it doesn't. Granted there are plenty of religious types that go beyond the core teachings of their faith and make up all sorts of hard and fast rules but that is simply man mucking up religion which should be purely spiritual.

But what do I really know?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Jan 22, 2010 12:25pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

i thought i could slip that one by. Foolish of me. Although one might argue that he changed (expanded?) the laws of gravity. No small feat nonetheless.

I would argue what Einstein did was the example I have been asking for. The ability to observe the effects of gravity on light was no small feat and out of the realm of everyday experience.

However it was also Einstein who could not deal with the implications of some of his own findings and inserted a constant in one of his equations. That constant prevented his equation from suggesting that the universe was expanding. Worked well for Hubble though.

As for the point about science and religion, that was exactly what i was attempting to say above. Once again you say it much better than I.

This post was modified by elbow1126 on 2010-01-22 20:25:48

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 12:29pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

I didn't think for one second that you were trying to slip one by, but it's just a good example of how science continues to move forward, and also how even the best and the brightest can get it wrong. (Although haven't recent theories of dark energy tended to support Einstein's cosmological constant in that the big bang expansion isn't slowing as theory predicted it would? But I guess being right accidentally doesn't quite count ...)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 8:35pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: All crows are black...Rob, elb, & Ring-a-lo

As mentioned below, most accept the falsification demarcation in science today...and yes, we can never know something to be true, but we can, with subtle asides I leave aside, KNOW something to be false.

Thus my comment below, scientists are in the biz of accumulating unfalsified theories, and we do refer to them as "proven" but you are absolutely right, Rob...we shouldn't, and I've been telling my students that for 30 yrs...

Now, the apples and oranges biz that elb, ring-0 and you were involved in, to me, came across as exactly that...

When we say "observable", it can indirect, as your excellent examples demonstrate. Most of nuclear physics is of this nature. Yet, it is distinctly observable when we derive a prediction that if true, would falsify the theory, and test it in the real world ("substance X should do Y when we do Z to it...ah ha! I just saw Z happen!"). Conversely, we often say these counter results "support" or "prove" the theory, but it's just like counting black crows.

When can you say "all crows are black"? When you've counted every one...whoops...another hatched in Scotland! But of course, you can know this statement is false in one instance...and it also "proves" (har) why that statement, which is falsifiable, is a more useful statement than the wishy washy "some crows may sometimes be black" (info content = zero...think about it...right?).

There, did you ever imagine I could be this pedantic?

Of course you did!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 22, 2010 12:13pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

I gotta get back to work and I am obviously not expressing myself clearly here. Context: I'm an atheist - not arguing for "design" here in any way. I was just trying to say that "experience" isn't really the criterion science relies on mainly to "prove" anything. Lots of things are proven that completely defy ordinary human experience. Such as, the earth is round, and whirling through space. My experience says it is flat and standing still.

We're just arguing about what "experience" means, I think -you're including use of high-tech devices as part of human experience and of course you're right, I was referring to more "direct" experience, defining "direct" much more strictly, as things we can see, feel, touch etc. We can't see most of the celestial bodies without telescopes, for instance, yet we are certain they are there.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 7:47pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Ha--missed all this stuff today on the other aspects of science...

Mixing "paradigms", "theories", "hypotheses", and "facts" in these exchanges above.

Science is both a way of knowing, and a body of knowledge.

Paradigms, like evolution and relativity, and "accepted as true", and not likely to be refuted by individual experiments.

Science as a way of knowing is: referential to natural law; observable; explanatory; falsifiable (statements have to have content); and tentative.

Science as a body of knowledge is fun facts and figures, and well supported paradigms and theories.

Recall that strictly speaking, nothing in science is ever, EVER, proven true. Rather, it has withstood so many tests it is accepted as "true" for the time being...

Enough of lec 101 for the night!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cush212 Date: Jan 22, 2010 8:26pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

My dear Brother Tell... Somehow I suspect That you occaisanly escape from 1968...

;)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 11:06am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Well no. I can demonstrate experimentally that if I drop zinc into hydrochloric acid I'll get hydrogen every time, which I can ignite and experience that characteristic popping sound. Or more simply than that, I can show that pure water will freeze at 0C and boil it at 100C - both within the realms of everyday experience. Does these things come under the umbrella of scientific proof?

(Elbow and Tell feel free to jump in at any time!)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 22, 2010 11:08am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

It depends on how you define direct experience or observation. Huge parts of what science knows today, it knows through techniques and technologies that go well beyond what humans can observe or experience directly. I mean, if we relied on direct experience, we wouldn't know that most of the universe is even out there.

But yeah we need real scientists to say something real about this, I'm usually just opining ignorantly on these topics.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 11:41am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

"if we relied on direct experience, we wouldn't know that most of the universe is even out there"

Well we can look and see. Science is founded on observation and experimentation and using telescopes, microscopes, spectrometers and whatever other tools we can fabricate to extend our senses isn't cheating or taking things out of the realm of experience.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 22, 2010 11:51am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Yeah - if you define direct observation to include telescopes and microscopes etc. I was defining it more strictly.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 11:54am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

So how strict were you being? Do you believe, for example, that bacteria might not actually exist because no one can see them with the naked eye? I guess there's a possibility that the diseases and other phenomena we attribute to bacteria might just be the work of mischievious invisible demons, but then again...


"We're going to pause for about three or four seconds and scratch our asses and think it over." Robert Hall Weir.

bonus deadhead points if you can name that show :-)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 22, 2010 12:04pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

>So how strict were you being? Do you believe, for example, that bacteria might not actually exist because no one can see them with the naked eye?

No, no, I'm arguing the opposite, I'm on your side :)

>I guess there's a possibility that the diseases and other phenomena we attribute to bacteria might just be the work of mischievious invisible demons, but then again...

I'm saying that if we weren't willing to accept as proof things that aren't directly observable, we would still be at the stage where we did attribute disease to demons. (Of course, a frightening percentage of the world's population *does* believe such things, or things that sound a little less wifty but come down to the same.)

>"We're going to pause for about three or four seconds and scratch our asses and think it over." Robert Hall Weir.

>bonus deadhead points if you can name that show :-)

No but let me know which show it is LOL.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 22, 2010 4:45pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

I think I met a demon at a GD show. But every dog has his day.

It burn off both your ears if I told you all that went down.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 9:10am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Right--there really is a simple demarcation with respect to science and its domain (the natural world, explanations for it, and how to best go about understanding it and predicting things [epistomology]) vs matters of faith, ethics, and really, all the important stuff in this world for which science is equally irrelevant.

As I often tell my students, "in the same fashion you don't want religious presumptions to serve as a backdrop for your understanding of the natural world and natural phenomena, you certainly don't want a bunch of nerds in white lab coats (Larry? Tell? You must be kidding!) occupying a position of authority when it comes to issues like 'what is good?' or 'what is an ethical life?' or 'how best can society serve the interests of individuals and the greater good?', right?"

Science is really a very restrictive domain; not the only way to gain a progressive understanding of the world around us, and certainly full of pitfalls and problems, but it is the best system yet developed for addressing issues like putting some clown on the moon, or developing a treatment program for prostate cancer (yeah!), etc., etc.

So, the popular notion that science and religion are thus entirely separate realms of understanding is of course, fundamentally true, but in general, for those that practice science day in and day out, it comes down to what Rob said, and as usually, he nails it: because we can't know, and it seems to serve no purpose (IOHO), it really is an academic pursuit...with little significance (no wonder I spend so much time on it, eh?).

Hope this hasn't been too much of a soap box thread--dreaded waking up this morning and finding criticism of my having gone off on this tangent, but assume by the responses above, the few, the bored, the eccentric joined in and all I can say is "don't encourage me!"...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billydlions Date: Jan 22, 2010 9:43am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Hey Tell, I promise this is my one and only religious post (isn't this a GD forum?). You're a scientific guy, and I have no idea where you stand on the issue (nor am I asking), but isn't there only 2 ways to look at this: 1) you believe and you're wrong or 2) you dont believe and you're wrong. so what are the potential consequences of each. 1) I cant think of any negatives for the time and money I've given the church given what I've gotten out of it (friends, support of good causes, etc) 2) consequences for #2- we'll I'm not going there, but that's something each person needs to decide.

I'm just curious how you would apply a reasonable rationalization for this. On that note I'll shut up.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 9:58am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Can't you believe and be right? Or not believe and be right?
Anyway, this argument is along the lines of Pascal's wager, which can be simplified as ‘If God does not exist, one will lose nothing by believing in him, while if he does exist, one will lose everything by not believing.’

The probability of god's existence logically, I guess, is 0.5 - either there is or there isn't with no possibility of an inbetween solution. On those grounds, it may be argued, that it takes cast-iron cojones to be an atheist in that you chance losing an eternity of paradise in exchange for a lifetime of being a smartass. But seemingly I'm still a smartass.


"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
Stephen F Roberts

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 10:37am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

This is why that movie quote by Kirk Douglas as Odysseus has such appeal to the two of us (the one about his rejection of immortality for the joy of the mortal life...never could find the antecedent in either of Homer's tomes; well, the gist is there, but nothing like the screenwriter's version!).

I'll go on an odyssey ANYTIME with you, my fine word-crafting friend!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 10:46am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

At the risk of incurring the wrath of the Arbinator (whose existence cannot be doubted) I shall take this Facebook moment to say what a great joy it is to be on this forumite odyssey with you. (You take Scylla, I'll grab Charybdis...)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Jan 22, 2010 10:18am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Don't forget us Catholics we can believe and be smartasses

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 9:54am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Ha! Hey, as long as no one else tells us to shut up, WTF? It's our own little thread buried down here, not at the top of the board, so no big deal, right?

I'd say the proposition you outline is a really an example of rather silly proposition (sorry, but think about it objectively as I outline below): it only seems reasonable to you because of 2000 yrs of culturally history. Seriously.

Imagine what this conversation would look like: you arrive in the New World, and you outline the Christian background to the heathens, and then conclude with the choice just outlined above. They chat among themselves, and then give YOU the exact same proposition, BUT now they substitute their silly notions (to you anyway) about the Mother God of Earth, and the Spirit of the Wolf, blah, blah, blah...they give you the same choice: believe and no harm, but some good MAY come. Deny and some harm MAY come, so why don't you go along?

Well, of course in this case, you CAN'T go along with their Gods because of YOUR religion.

But, if you were me, a scientist, would you go along with the heathen's proposals?

I know you'll know be inclined to defend your religion (Christianity I assume) is "better" than the heathens, etc., etc., etc.

But, I would ask, just think about that a while. It cannot be decided, unless you argue ethics, independent of deities...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billydlions Date: Jan 22, 2010 10:12am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Good points as expected. Of course I look at it as having only 1 choice: there is some God out there (call it whatever name you'd like) or there is none. We all have free will to choose to believe or not believe with whatever else comes with that. I guess I'm saying I have no regrets either way! Now back to the music.

p.s. you are one of the few who can debate with civility which I guess attracts me to offer my opinions, however silly they may be. Cheers!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 10:32am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Thanks, BD--much appreciated. I always enjoy our chats as well.

And, for what's worth to you, in spite of the appearance of hypocrisy (I actually think not, but understand the notion), I have a huge amount of christianity/catholic guilt (ha, but truly!)/jesuit background as an Irish Catholic by upbringing, and in spite of all the negative stuff that was brought up about organized religion, like Rob said, there is a LOT of GOOD in that cultural baggage too...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Jan 22, 2010 9:31am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Sounds like you've given this some thought

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKvURliwsfY&;feature=related

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 22, 2010 10:55am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Well, you have more credibility than I do saying so, since you're a scientist and I'm not, but I think the idea that science and religion are separate realms and should stay off each other's territory is overblown. What actually bothers a lot of religious people is precisely that science *does* have a lot to say about many religious topics. Religious people just don't like the answers.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: high flow Date: Jan 22, 2010 11:49am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Yes to all. I understand now. I require no further convincing.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Jan 22, 2010 12:55pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Hey high flow you actually are following this and all you can chime in with is "I'm convinced"?

Come-on add you 3 cents

Hey Will (Arrow Boy) Tell, Can I quote you on the "Blah Blah Blah"?

Woooooooo Hoooooooooo
Gotta love the fob
http://www.archive.org/details/gd1978-01-22.fob.akgd224e.holwein.motb-0086.101436.flac16

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 12:01pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Yes, that was why I said the "notion of independence..." or whatever...it is defn oversimplified.

Strictly speaking, though, at the most basic level, it's true since they deal with diff components of the human condition (science really is about explaining the natural world; to the degree your religion intrudes on naturalistic explanations, you are right--religion always loses to science)...what I would say is that the really important stuff, like ethics, culture, blah, blah, blah, is largely uninformed by "science".

This may really upset folks, but a classic example of how science does not provide IMPORTANT information on the REAL issue, is to take abortion debates and the absurd question often asked "when does life start for an individual?" (which some religious sorts have asked me thinking "this is where science CAN help my case against prochoice folks!"). The answer disturbs both sides since it is "life never stops...the question doesn't make sense since sperm and egg are most defn 'alive' and thus, it is NOT a scientific issue because what we really want to know is when is an individual an individual, and this depends on your view of ethics, individuality,...blah, blah, blah"

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 12:16pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

I would argue that ethics and morality should be held apart from, though informed by, both science and religion. Surely, if we are to achieve some sort of maturity as a species, we can determine on a way of behaving towards each other that is neither dependent on the cold logic of scientific rigour, nor on the arbitrary rewards and punishments of a putative deity.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 12:45pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Hey!? I thought this is how I was supposed to "run" this place: "...the arbitrary rewards and punishments of a putative deity."

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 12:49pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

"We're going to pause for about three or four seconds and scratch our asses and think it over." Robert Hall Weir.

So, Diane couldn't name that show. How about you, big brain?


(Marvel at the way in which I inexorably swing the discussion back to the GRATEFUL DEAD - whoever those bums are...)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cush212 Date: Jan 22, 2010 3:55pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

You do quite often amaze yourself Rob...

;)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 2:08pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Didn't know, but here you go (it's in there somewheres):

http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=222903

[see? I can find threads with the best of em]

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 2:29pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Cheat! (But yeah it's there!)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 3:32pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

I don't actually listen to that one much...Oct of 71, right? Or was it 70? Can't recall--too lazy. Have a good rest of the (late) evening, Rob!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 4:04pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

10-30-71, just before Truckin'.

It's just gone midnight here and I'm going to sign off from the forum, but thanks to you, Larry, jg, Cliff, ringo, mando, ghost, cush, snori, Miss D, and doubtless others I'm too tired to bring to mind for a damn fine day. Goodnight all.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 6:24pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Good night! And good morning now...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Jan 23, 2010 5:50am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Good Morning William (PM) Tell

Off to go frostbite sailing this AM. Should be good; cool, clear mid to high 30s with a 10 kt NE breeze.

Fun thread yesterday eh -- science and religion -- almost as much fun as politics. I heard a blue state is turning red somewhere in the North East.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 23, 2010 7:26am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Burrr! Jeeezzz....just thinking about your day makes me cold! Storms have let up out West here for a bit...

Have a great day, j! And yep, looks like Teddy et al. have given up the control of Dire's neighborhood...if I have my geography right.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Jan 22, 2010 4:15pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

just remember, there's nothing at the end of the rainbow....

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 4:27pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

But I'll be a friend I'll tell you what's in store ...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Jan 22, 2010 9:55am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

I suspect if you polled my current and former students and postdocs they would probably tell you that I am pretty good at preaching, but i don't think the gospel according to elbow is best delivered on sunday mornings.

Your are quite correct and I think that is the part that gets lost in the "religion vs. science" debate. There is no moral right and wrong in science while that seems to be imo one of the two important roles that religion should play. To help explain the difference between right and wrong and to help people cope with the unexplainable. The former doesn't change while the latter does, in part due to science. Not sure all (any?) religions deal with that change so well.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 22, 2010 5:11pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

"There is no moral right and wrong in science "

Choices in funding and national character mostly determine the results of science. It's not like we're just digging randomly for information on certain kinds of genetics, quarks and bosons, climate changes, or cave art. It's not like great men are finding hidden treasure -- it's more like we're looking in a mirror.

With technology this is even greater -- artifacts do have politics, to quote Langdon Winner. The social organization and requirements of nuclear power means a far different set of centralization and reverse human adaptation than decentralized solar, renewables, and conservation.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Jan 22, 2010 8:22pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

don't confuse science with scientists or worse the funding of science. I was only saying that science is not where one should look to determine what is morally right and wrong. Those questions are not answered by science.

As for what science gets done, the unfortunate truth is that the funds are limited and for those of us who review grant applications that are going to use federal funding, we owe it to the tax payers to try to pick the applications that will likely be the most successful. Unfortunately that probably does restricts advancement to some extent.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 23, 2010 7:30am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

I'm not confused. Science is a pretty good way to reach some consensus about knowledge, but the point is that it is conditioned as well as conditional.

Much of science is benign if not very useful, which is not so bad in an era headed for self-destruction.

This post was modified by spacedface on 2010-01-23 15:30:52

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 23, 2010 7:37am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

True about much of science...a great deal of what I do would be classified under "who cares?" (always recall my father-in-law saying "you actually can get paid for doing this?!").

But, you never know when a factoid on the science as body biz will come to some immensely useful purpose: eg, my very good buddies, the Gila monsters, whose venom is now providing a variety of vital components in various disease treatment plans (eg, diabetes, etc.).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 23, 2010 7:47am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Yah I do get into grand overstatements.

Perhaps the most interesting undergrad professor I had was a biologist. I came in prepared for boredom and he made it my most exciting class. It was too late to switch majors and avoid the droney teachers though.

There can be real value in what may appear useless or tedious to some, as so many nature documentaries show.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 23, 2010 9:30am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Ha--yep, not many of my nonbio profs held my attn...and though it reeks of "group hug/self-congratulatoy" babble, enjoyed our discussions immensely, SF...great fun. Educational too! If we keep this up, though, the powers that be hereabouts just might put us all in our own "DEAD inspired topics of the mundane, unanswerable, and esoteric" subforum!?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 23, 2010 9:57am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Geez, Tell! are you still banging on with this godbothering stuff? Get ye to the subforum!


change_of_subject_seal.png

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 23, 2010 10:07am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Bob, Bobby, whoever, is one scary cult leader. He's a genius at putting together paranoid fantasies that seem so real.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 23, 2010 10:28am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

And who's to say they're not?

:-)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 23, 2010 11:16am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

I guess you've got to learn to live with what you can't rise above if you want to ride on down in through this tunnel of love.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 23, 2010 11:49am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Well I don't care how many girls you've dated, man
But you ain't lived till you've had your tires rotated

By a red headed woman
A red headed woman
It takes a red headed woman
To get a dirty job done

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Jan 23, 2010 10:31am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

GIVE ME SLACK!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 23, 2010 10:34am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

F.E.I.T.C.T.A.J.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Jan 23, 2010 10:38am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

I've missed X-Day for well over a decade. Maybe next time.

http://www.myspace.com/ivanstang

Here's to a worthy TDIH:

http://www.archive.org/details/radams2008-01-23.sbd.flac16

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 23, 2010 10:49am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Funny you should mention Ryan. Just been listening to a nice compilation of his Dead covers. Knowing you you'll already have it - but just in case:

http://www.ryanadamsarchive.com/showthread.php?p=61815#post61815

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Jan 23, 2010 10:52am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Thanks; I didn't. Will check it out. Hope he's getting bored with married life and ready to get back out there....

Kudos to Phil for helping get him and Jackie G out to a wider audience

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 23, 2010 11:23am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Absolutely second those Phil kudos. You'll doubtless have checked out this Jackie G show with Phil and Bob guesting

http://www.archive.org/details/jgreene2009-02-18.lou.flac16

I kind of liked it - and judging by the whooping and hollering the audience did too...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 23, 2010 10:01am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

I don't know about a subforum.

I'm more bugged now by how Cliff likes 1-20-68 better than 1-22. I need to revisit the 1st half of '68.

This post was modified by spacedface on 2010-01-23 18:01:30

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Jan 22, 2010 7:32am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Excellent sentence, I am referring of course to the one that mentions "intellectual crowbarring". I must say that is a new one for me.

For the intelligent design folks I say "What better design is there than evolution?" It is self perpetuating and self correcting and has resulted in (so far) endless variability and variety.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 8:01am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Ah yes, but surely the point is that there is no 'design' involved in evolution? It simply arises naturally as a consequence of a combination of random mutation and environmental selection pressure.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Jan 22, 2010 8:05am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

And I, playing devils advocate, would say. . .

Who's to say the statement "simply arises naturally as a consequence of a combination of random mutation and environmental selection pressure" is not in fact part of the design?

If the 'design' is built into the smallest / earliest component (one so small that our big monkey brains can't conceive of it) then what we see and perceive is simply the manifestation of the design we can not perceive nor comprehend.

Does everything come down to semantics and human's imperfect ability to communicate?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jan 22, 2010 8:29am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

"Does everything come down to semantics and human's imperfect ability to communicate?"

Probably, yes. :-)

There's an awful lot that our monkey brains can't grasp - wave/particle duality for one. How can light behave like a wave when you look at it one way and like a stream of particles when you look at another? How can electrons go from being probabalistic smears around atoms to being a flow of energy that keeps my computer powered? We try to come to terms with what we discover by relating it to what we already know (or think we know) and come up short. Being who and what we are it's virtually impossible for us to see the universe from anything other than an anthropocentric point of view. The wonder is that we try.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Jan 22, 2010 8:34am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

I knew I was in trouble when I first heard of the Uncertainty Principle and immediately fell in love with it.

"The more precisely the position is determined, the less precisely the momentum is known in this instant, and vice versa."
--Heisenberg, uncertainty paper, 1927

http://www.aip.org/history/heisenberg/p08.htm

Damned monkey brains

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 22, 2010 8:44am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

That's not exactly just semantics. If you just want to say that everything is evidence of "design," then the term design has no real meaning. Anything that explains everything, really explains nothing.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Jan 22, 2010 8:54am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Yes. So perhaps it is simply plain design as opposed to intelligent design. Or maybe I am oversimplifying as in my mind the fact that all is not simply chaos then there must be design.

One of my biggest problems with the intelligent design crowd is that they presume to be able to understand a design created by a deity. It seems they are attempting to prove the existence of God when in fact God is about faith not proof. If one has faith no 'proof' is needed, if one lacks faith then one constantly seeks proof.

On a lighter note (it will only feel like an eternity):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-8GIEQjqW8

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 22, 2010 10:51am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

And there's also the problem that the design looks sometimes intelligent, and sometimes pretty stupid and cruel. If there was a designer, he or she was brilliant in some ways, but capricious and certainly not entirely benevolent.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 22, 2010 4:30pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Benevolent to us doesn't mean there's not a larger picture that we can understand from our limited sense of time and space.

That's the answer to Job right?

And inordinate pride in ourselves precedes a fall.

This post was modified by spacedface on 2010-01-23 00:30:45

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 23, 2010 5:19am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Fine - this designer was not entirely benevolent to *us*. Maybe he or she has some larger purpose in mind, but I fail to see why I should be interested in it, let alone *worship* such a deity, if it has no care for me.

I cringe hearing people in any disaster like Haiti saying that God blessed them or there is a God after all, when *their* loved ones are rescued safely, or *their* house didn't fall down. I understand why people say such things in extremis, but I'm left to assume God squashed all those other people, and is making the survivors suffer horribly, because he didn't like them, or forgot to bless them.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 23, 2010 7:33am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

"not entirely benevolent to *us*. ... such a deity, if it has no care for me."

Not entirely doesn't equate with no care. That reveals your feelings about God more than the nature of God himself (really an ungendered nonduality).


"I'm left to assume God squashed all those other people, and is making the survivors suffer horribly, because he didn't like them, or forgot to bless them."

Humans are that good at imagining the eons involved in the creation of the heavens and the earth. That's one thing that modern science has shown us -- the vastness of the cosmos. It could be that God was punishing some, purifying some, and elevating others.

It's not that hard to imagine in a country like Haiti that's been screwed so often in 200 years by those inside and out.

For me it's a bit worrisome in general and more self-interested terms. The big San Francisco earthquake will be bad enough, but if the right wing is in power it could be so much worse, in the light of the responses to New Orleans and Haiti.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 23, 2010 8:20am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

"It could be that God was punishing some, purifying some, and elevating others."

"It's not that hard to imagine in a country like Haiti that's been screwed so often in 200 years by those inside and out."

This, too, I have trouble following you. I don't subscribe to philosophies such as God punishing people with earthquakes. yuck. I think I might say back to you, "That reveals your feelings about God more than the nature of God himself."

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 23, 2010 9:13am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Maybe you don't know about Haiti. I can't tell.

I'm sorta simple so I get a lot from rock songs. When I heard Robert Plant in "Heaven Knows" mention "with all the romance of the TonTon Macoutte," I looked it up. The Duvaliers, US supported dictators, employed the voodoo-ish Tonton Macoutes in a reign of terror against any opponents, including those who proposed progressive social systems.

The island of Hispaniola is where Columbus first landed, and has seen enormous suffering since. Haiti is the only country in the new world to gain independence from a slave revolt led by slaves, an so was seen as a danger to be punished by example by the European colonial powers.

Even Disney, the bastion of "family values," has paid Haitians starvation wages. Still, much of the suffering has been self-inflicted and the hall of mirrors nature of Haitians politics and violence is confusing.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 25, 2010 6:19pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

I do know a bit of this; I never got why any of that would mean the earthquake was a punishment.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 23, 2010 9:53am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

"I don't subscribe to philosophies such as God punishing people with earthquakes. yuck."

Again not everyone is punished ultimately; they maybe be purified or elevated.

It seems clear that nature (small n) is filled with examples of both beauty and awesome majesty.

Going down the road feeling bad
Going down the road feeling bad
Going down the road feeling bad, hey hey hey, yeah
Don't wanna be treated this a way

One saying attributed to Jesus:
~ The world is a Bridge, pass over it, but build no houses upon it. He who hopes for a day, may hope for eternity; but the World endures but an hour. Spend it in prayer for the rest is unseen.


This post was modified by spacedface on 2010-01-23 17:53:52

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Jan 23, 2010 9:58am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or whatever from W. Somerset Maugham)

Tao. Some of us look for the Way in opium and some in God, some of us in whiskey and some in love. It is all the same Way and it leads nowhither.
W. Somerset Maugham, The Painted Veil, 1925

A God that can be understood is no God. Who can explain the Infinite in words?
W. Somerset Maugham, The Razor's Edge, 1943

..I couldn't but surmise that the devil, looking at the cruel wars that Christianity has occasioned, the persecutions, the tortures Christian has inflicted on Christian, the unkindness, the hypocracy, the intolerance, must consider the balance sheet with complacency. And when he remembers that it has laid upon mankind the bitter burden of the sense of sin that has darkened the beauty of the starry night and cast a baleful shadow on the passing plesures of a world to be enjoyed, he must chuckle as he murmurs: give the devil his due." [W. Somerset Maugham, "The Razor's Edge"]

D'you remember how Jesus was led into the wilderness and fasted forty days? Then, when he was a-hungered, the devil came to him and said: If thou be the son of God, command that these stones be made bread. But Jesus resisted the temptation. Then the devil set him on a pinnacle of the temple and said to him: If thou be the son of God, cast thyself down. For angels had charge of him and would bear him up. But again Jesus resisted. Then the devil took him into a high mountain and showed him the kingdoms of the world and said that he would give them to him if he would fall down and worship him. But Jesus said: Get thee hence, Satan. That's the end of the story according to the good simple Matthew. But it wasn't. The devil was sly and he came to Jesus once more and said: If thou will accept shame and disgrace, scourging, a crown of thorns and death on the cross thou shalt save the human race, for greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Jesus fell. The devil laughed till his sides ached, for he knew the evil men would commit in the name of their redeemer.
W. Somerset Maugham (1874-1965)
The Razor's Edge, 1944
Chapter 5, iv

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Jan 24, 2010 6:38pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or whatever from W. Somerset Maugham)

http://haitirewired.wired.com/profiles/blogs/a-haitian-history-reading-list

A Haitian History Reading List from WIRED.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 23, 2010 7:33am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Oh yeah--as Rob echo'd your comment, so did I...cringe is too weak of a word for it!

Argh...BTW, really enjoy kicking this all around with you, Rob, elb, jgl and SF...good stuff, but I truly hope I am not completely boring everyone to tears with all this lecture-esque drivel.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 23, 2010 8:18am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Likewise. I mean, enjoying it. I always say I have no use for religion but I do tend to get drawn into religion-bashing discussions, and also may need to be told to back off I get too high and mighty. It's too easy to make fun of religion, sometimes.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jan 22, 2010 10:45am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Maybe the word you want is "pattern," or "function," rather than design. "Design" implies somebody designed it. The thing about evolution is, well, the whole point is nobody had to design it, it works anyway, nobody's in charge of it, nobody had a grand plan, nobody has added "meanings" to it, etc. It *isn't* chaos, and yet nobody had to step in to make order out of the chaos - it made itself not chaos.

Which is why it really makes no sense when religious people say that evolution is easily reconciled with belief in God, because God must have been the one who "designed" evolution. If you understand evolution, adding god or "design" is not just superfluous, but nonsensical.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Jan 22, 2010 8:15am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God - non dead (or perhaps dead, according to Nietzsche)

Then you wouldn't be arguing the point of intelligent design.

When friends have asked me about this I point out that the problem with ID was that it was a scientific version of creationism with about as much science behind it as the book of Genesis. The danger was that it was going to be taught in schools as science. Thankfully that was squashed in court battles. I have no issues with teaching creation btw, just not as science. Keep it where it belongs in the religion classes.

What you suggest is an interesting twist because it implies that "the designer" purposely created an imperfect system that would allow for variation both within and between species. However some of those same imperfections in DNA replication fidelity that is so useful for the species, can cause hardship for the individual. Hardship that often results in prayer to the designer. Was that the most "intelligent" approach?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: mythicshadow Date: Jan 21, 2010 1:59pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead



.......dew u likey miracle whippers ...? benDeeone... there

...A The ist .... theata... and wee bee a heatin his toasters ferr shure... ahahahhaha

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: banditos33 Date: Jan 22, 2010 2:52pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Thanks Tell this forum can always count on you to side level headed (not sarcastic)seriously. I was going towards the last point you made and just asking a question. as far as self rightious as JOTS states I am not. Although a southern Baptist all of my life I am not a hard liner I mostly go now so my kids hopefully wont be as fucked up as I was. Personially I dont care who or what people believe in that encourages them to be an upright human. It is not my job to say who is right or wrong and would only be an opinion. cause the wheel is turning

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 22, 2010 3:31pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

I hear ya; yeah, whatever all of us godless f**ks have to say about it, we are in the minority...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cush212 Date: Jan 22, 2010 3:51pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Treat our Brothers and Sisters as we would like to be treated ourselves... Best religion I know of...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Jan 21, 2010 8:26am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

Thoughts & Prayers for your Dad's Op. Hoping it all goes smoothly.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: skuzzlebutt Date: Jan 20, 2010 3:55pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

All good prayers and thoughts your dad and the rest of your clan.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: RBNW....new and improved! Date: Jan 20, 2010 4:04pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I Need a Miracle every day - non dead

A box of rain will ease the pain and love will see you through...